Legal Opinion

Donnelly v. Minneapolis Manufacturing Co.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided December 12, 1924No. 24,278PublishedCited by 34 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStone, J.

In this case, plaintiff, an employe of defendant, seeks to recover damages because, as he alleges, plaintiff contracted “an occupational disease,” known as “chronic bronchitis with chemical poisoning” on account of the negligence of defendant. A general demurrer to the complaint was sustained and plaintiff appeals. Taking the complaint at its face value, as we must for present purposes, plaintiff has become afflicted with the disease in question because defendant, a manufacturer among other things of flax straw products, violated the duty imposed upon it by section 4, chapter 491, p. 645, L.…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. King v. Viscoloid Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
  2. Mathison v. Minneapolis Street Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1914
  3. Jellico Coal Co. v. AdkinsCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1923
  4. Hyett v. Northwestern Hospital for Women & ChildrenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1920
  5. Shinnick v. Clover Farms Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1915

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. Beck v. GroeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1955
  2. Masich v. United States Smelting, Refining & Mining Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1948
  3. In re ShetskySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1953
  4. Nelson v. SandkampSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1948
  5. Griffith v. Raven Red Ash Coal Co.Supreme Court of Virginia · 1942

29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API